They have White characteristics because Whites mixed with them.
Not because their races had White characteristics.
Rahotep and Nofret are both mixed.
But their noses are straight, not Semitic.
This mixing has already begun by the 4th dynasty.
the blue eyed reference, 1760 BC is already 1300 years after the first Egyptian kings.

Not necessarly friend, that is a fallacy. All Caucasian sub-races are somewhat related (they have the same origin but then split and evolved in separate groups/regions) so it's natural they share some similar traits (to a lesser or greater extend).

There's many dark Caucasian peoples that have 0% negroid DNA but developed those characteristics during thousands of years of adaptation.

Quote:

Not because their races had White characteristics.

Cro-magnons came into Europe after stabilizing in the Arabian Peninsula 40.000 years ago, they were rather dark compared to modern europeans, the gene that allowed the development of very light skin was developed after the last glacial maximum (about 11-15.000 years ago) and the gene for blue eyes mutation was developed about 8-9.000 years ago. We know that Neanderthals had those traits but Cro-magnons didn't, Neaderthals became extinct, Cromagnids survived and there's only between 1 to 4% neanderthal admixture in modern Eurasians and North Africans. You see there were obviously convergent evolutions in the west Eurasian landmass.

Quote:

Rahotep and Nofret are both mixed.

What you call mixed, it's probably nothing else than an intermediate phenotype developed according to environmental adaptations during thousands of years. Not all is the product of mixing, that is myth that has been spread by some outdated propaganda.

Ever wondered why the region in Europe that has the lighter pigmentation is Scandinavia and Baltic region and it's precisely in Scandinavia where the percentage of the I1 haplogroup (the only originated in Europe and to wich the european cromagnids belonged) is significant ?

Puts in question the bonde-blue eyed migration theory, infact there's no evidence that indo-europeans were an homogeneous looking groups of peoples. They had already a wide range of phenotypes.

Quote:

But their noses are straight, not Semitic.

I know what you mean but that's simply a cliché, there's no semitic nose and there's no semitic race. Semitic is a linguistic group not a sub-race or phenotype. There are semitics of a wide range of phenotypes. Naturally since those languages are spread mostly in the Levant/Arabian peninsula region that are misleadingly associated with the most common phenotypes in that region. But one thing has no relation with another.

Like it's a fallacy to talk about an Aryan race, another confusion between a linguistic group and certain phenotypes. There are Aryan speakers of a wide range of phenotypes.

About the nose shape, the hook nose is a result of an extreme dinarcization, and that is a process that is seen in many parts of the World with peoples that have little or no connection with Semitics. It's quite common in mountainous regions.

Steffi Graf - German - phenotype Norid

Von Mannstein - German - Norid

Bradley Wiggin - British - phenotype Keltic Nordid

Martin Huba - Slovak - phenotype Dinarid

Zambrotta - Italian - Dinaro-Mediterranid

Alain Prost - French (Armenian parents) - Armenid

François Hollande - French - Alpinoid-Dinarid

Arabid

Reza Pahalavi - Iranian - Iranid phenotype

Native American Chief

Evo Moralez - Bolivian amerindian

Quote:

This mixing has already begun by the 4th dynasty.

Pure speculation, the typical nonsensical generalizations and unfounded propaganda found in ridiculous books like the March of the Titans.

Quote:

the blue eyed reference, 1760 BC is already 1300 years after the first Egyptian kings.

You see...not even close to the early dynasties and we have a great predominance of darker examples from earlier periods/dynasties so there's no logic in that theory.

Not necessarly friend, that is a fallacy. All Caucasian sub-races are somewhat related

I don't agree with this "Caucasoid" perspective of assessment of White subraces
So you are starting off on a premise which I think is false

Quote:

(they have the same origin but then split and evolved in separate groups/regions)

again, I don't agree with this theory.

Your maps of Y Haplotype don't prove anything, except that, in those regions there were -- at some point -- males of a certain Y Haplotype. Nothing more.

Quote:

Cro-magnons came into Europe after stabilizing in the Arabian Peninsula 40.000 years ago, they were rather dark compared to modern europeans, the gene that allowed the development of very light skin was developed after the last glacial maximum (about 11-15.000 years ago) and the gene for blue eyes mutation was developed about 8-9.000 years ago. We know that Neanderthals had those traits but Cro-magnons didn't,

More theories. no conclusive evidence.
Just speculations, to try and fit the overall Out of Africa Theory.

Quote:

You see...not even close to the early dynasties and we have a great predominance of darker examples from earlier periods/dynasties so there's no logic in that theory.

No -- to find darker kings among the later dynasties is expected

when the Greeks arrive around 320 BC there is a new race introduced to the mix.

Quote:

I know what you mean but that's simply a cliché, there's no semitic nose and there's no semitic race.

There is a definite origin for the Semitic nose in a particular ancient people.

I don't agree with this "Caucasoid" perspective of assessment of White subraces
So you are starting off on a premise which I think is false

I never said there was no mixing and that some phenotypes are a product of it, but that is in my opinion highly exagerated and can't be the case when so many exemplars of a population share the same phenotype, then it's a sign that phenotype was a product of evolution and became stabilized.

You can see the predominant phenotypes change from region to region along all the Eurasian landmass and it's undeniable they obey a certain transitional logic.

There are some aberrant cases of phenoypes that were introduced in some regions via migrations/mixing like the Arabid predominance in modern Irak, negroid infusion in north Africans and certain mongoloid and arabid traits in Anatolia but apart from those aberrant outliers there's a progressive phenotypical logic related to geography in most Eurasia.

Quote:

Your maps of Y Haplotype don't prove anything, except that, in those regions there were -- at some point -- males of a certain Y Haplotype. Nothing more.

They are indicators, the haplogroups usually associated to indo-european expansions are R1a and R1b, they I1 was in Europe much before those and curiously it reaches 40% in southern Sweden wich is precisly the core of the Nordid phenotype. Any thoughts about this ?

Quote:

More theories. no conclusive evidence.
Just speculations, to try and fit the overall Out of Africa Theory.

So what's the alternative, it is pretty well established the map of our ancestors hominid migrations. The out of Africa theory means nothing regarding to race since races were not formed at that stage, don't know why some people have difficulty accepting it.

Quote:

No -- to find darker kings among the later dynasties is expected

And where are the lighter kings in the early dynasties ? The lighter depiction i saw was Hor (middle kingdom).

Quote:

when the Greeks arrive around 320 BC there is a new race introduced to the mix.

That seems obvious, finally we see fully europid phenotypes when the Hellenic dynasty was established.

Quote:

There is a definite origin for the Semitic nose in a particular ancient people.

Then why you see the same kind of dinarized noses in regions so distant and unrelated such as in the races of South America, North America, Northern Europe, Middle East etc. ?

Friend i'm telling you about it the first minute, you overestimate mixing and greatly undestimate convergent evolutions.

And where are the lighter kings in the early dynasties ? The lighter depiction i saw was Hor (middle kingdom).

The lighter, gracilized appear earlier, as in the 4th dynasty king and queen which are mixed, but still retain some White characteristics

Quote:

So what's the alternative, it is pretty well established the map of our ancestors hominid migrations. The out of Africa theory means nothing regarding to race since races were not formed at that stage, don't know why some people have difficulty accepting it.

Yes the Out of Africa idea is a "Theory," not fact

Quote:

Then why you see the same kind of dinarized noses in regions so distant and unrelated such as in the races of South America, North America, Northern Europe, Middle East etc. ?

Friend i'm telling you about it the first minute, you overestimate mixing and greatly undestimate convergent evolutions.

I don't agree with your opinions.

As for the nose, if you don't know which ancient people 3000 BC exemplified this characteristic, then you haven't done your research.

Albanians look to be an unGodly mix of Turk, Gypsy, and Arab.And Ugly as Sin!!!

I once told an Albo restaurant owner his children looked like a mix between a roma and a monkey. I took cash out of my pocket tossed it on the table and left. Wish I had known they were Albos before going in to eat.